On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Mason Freed <mas...@chromium.org> wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 9:06 AM Chris Harrelson <chris...@chromium.org> > wrote: > >> LGTM2 >> (Note: this LGTM is just for deprecation, please come back again for >> approval to remove.) >> > > Will do. And yeah I didn't think I needed LGTMs to deprecate, only to > remove, right? Akin to I2P not needing LGTM, but I2S needing them? > One LGTM <https://www.chromium.org/blink/launching-features/#deprecating-without-removal> is needed for this situation. > > >> On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 8:25 AM Vladimir Levin <vmp...@chromium.org> >> wrote: >> >>> LGTM1 to deprecate. This console message may be interpreted as noise if >>> the author decides that they are OK with the deprecation, but would not be >>> able to silence the warning. Because of this, the API owners strongly >>> suggest that we try to limit the deprecation to 3 milestones and either >>> proceed with removal or re-evaluate. >>> >> > Ok, hopefully the timeline is short. Developers would be able to silence > the warnings with a rule like `section h1 {font-size: 2em;}` so maybe that > alleviates the time pressure? > > >> On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 7:22 AM Simon Pieters <zcor...@mozilla.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Firefox has a similar console warning which reads: >>>> >>>> Found a sectioned h1 element with no specified font-size or margin >>>> properties. More information: >>>> https://developer.mozilla.org/docs/Web/HTML/Element/Heading_Elements#specifying_a_uniform_font_size_for_h1 >>>> >>> > Thanks! That's a helpful link. I've updated our deprecation message to > look closer to yours, and to include that link. > > Thanks, > Mason > > > >> cheers, >>>> >>>> On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 12:37 AM Mason Freed <mas...@chromium.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 7:25 PM Vladimir Levin <vmp...@chromium.org> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> The thing that gives me pause is the nature of the console warning. >>>>>> It isn't that <h1> within, say, <article> is deprecated, it's the fact >>>>>> that >>>>>> the special rules will be removed and thus the font size may look >>>>>> different. I'm not sure what action would be suggested for the authors. >>>>>> Can >>>>>> you comment on that? Is the recommendation to switch to <h2> to keep the >>>>>> current look? Or to just be aware of the change? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Great question. So the current text (at least the English version) >>>>> says this: >>>>> >>>>> The website has an <h1> tag within an <article>, <aside>, <nav>, or >>>>> <section>, and relies on deprecated UA stylesheet rules for the resulting >>>>> font size. See the second block of 'x h1' styles in >>>>> https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/rendering.html#sections-and-headings. >>>>> These special rules are deprecated and will be removed. See >>>>> https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/7867. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> So it does go to some length to try to explain the exact thing that is >>>>> being changed, but still it can be a bit confusing. And it doesn't make >>>>> specific suggestions for how to fix it, since I think those will be very >>>>> site-specific. Suggestions appreciated for how to improve the >>>>> effectiveness >>>>> and clarity of the message! I do agree it would help to have a very clear >>>>> message to avoid folks making changes they don't need to make. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Mason >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Tuesday, March 18, 2025 at 5:50:10 PM UTC-4 Mason Freed wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 11:15 AM Alex Russell < >>>>>>> slightly...@chromium.org> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This looks good, but I'm not sure I understand the plan. Is it to >>>>>>>> deprecate (w/ console warnings) for some period of time? Are you going >>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>> propose a reverse-OT? Or removal once usage falls below some threshold? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yep, it's a good question. The plan is to show console warnings >>>>>>> starting now (M136) for a period of time, and wait for Mozilla to >>>>>>> start/complete their removal. They are starting an experiment soon >>>>>>> <https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/7867#issuecomment-2711723856> >>>>>>> to assess the risk and compat, and my plan is to follow their lead. So I >>>>>>> would say that once they've moved forward with a general removal, I'd >>>>>>> send >>>>>>> an I2R (remove) and turn it off in Chrome. I'd likely do that slowly via >>>>>>> Finch, to ensure no breakage. I've historically found it tough to assess >>>>>>> actual risk via use counters alone, and the only true test is to use >>>>>>> Finch >>>>>>> and slowly/carefully test a removal. Once that process is successful, we >>>>>>> would disable it by default in code for all browsers. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> Mason >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Alex >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thursday, March 6, 2025 at 5:20:03 PM UTC-8 Mason Freed wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 7:46 PM Vladimir Levin <vmp...@chromium.org> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Re TAG: I don't believe we need a TAG review for deprecations or >>>>>>>>>> removals. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Great, thanks for confirming. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, March 4, 2025 at 8:54:00 PM UTC-5 Domenic Denicola >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It wasn't clear to me that this was just in the initial >>>>>>>>>> "deprecate" stage, not the "remove" stage: I wish ChromeStatus >>>>>>>>>> tooling >>>>>>>>>> separated those more cleanly (like it does Dev Trial vs. Ship). >>>>>>>>>> Given that >>>>>>>>>> you're still in the preparatory deprecation stage, this level of >>>>>>>>>> detail >>>>>>>>>> seems fine! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> +1. I used to edit the subject like to say "Intent to Deprecate" >>>>>>>>> (i.e. remove the "and Remove") but that broke some of the tooling, so >>>>>>>>> now I >>>>>>>>> don't touch it. But I do wish the descriptions changed to say >>>>>>>>> "deprecation" >>>>>>>>> instead of "dev trial" and "remove" instead of "ship". >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I do think a short explainer-like thing will be desirable before >>>>>>>>>> we get to the removal stage. Maybe just a few paragraphs detailing >>>>>>>>>> what's >>>>>>>>>> changing, what impact it might have on developers, and how they can >>>>>>>>>> adapt. >>>>>>>>>> Hopefully Mozilla can help put that together. A reasonable place for >>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>> to live would be the top message of the spec PR. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Sure, that makes sense. I think at that point there might be more >>>>>>>>> data to pull into the explainer also. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Interoperability and Compatibility >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Use counters are relatively high: https://chromestatus.com/ >>>>>>>>>> metrics/feature/timeline/popularity/4272 However, analysis from >>>>>>>>>> Mozilla shows that perhaps the impact is not as large as the use >>>>>>>>>> counters >>>>>>>>>> would suggest: https://github.com/whatwg/ >>>>>>>>>> html/issues/7867#issuecomment-2595987424 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> For posterity, it looks like about 0.6% of page loads would be >>>>>>>>>> affected, and that seems to have a gradual trend up. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> A deprecation seems fine here. What do you estimate a removal >>>>>>>>>> timeline to be? Ideally we can reduce the usecounters as much as we >>>>>>>>>> can >>>>>>>>>> before a removal. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I agree, it'd be nice to see the use counters go down before that, >>>>>>>>> but I always notice that deprecating things seems to make usage go >>>>>>>>> up. I >>>>>>>>> don't have a great estimate for the removal timeline - I'm following >>>>>>>>> Mozilla's lead on this, and ideally they turn it off by default first >>>>>>>>> for a >>>>>>>>> while, before Blink does. Sorry I don't have a more definite schedule! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Again for posterity, it seems like there was a single report >>>>>>>>>> about this, which was fixed on the author's side: >>>>>>>>>> https://mastodon.social/@zcorpan/113843744254923492 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Yep, thanks. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 5, 2025 at 8:00 AM Daniel Bratell <bratel...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Use counter is 0.6% but judging from the comment >>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/7867#issuecomment-1977647444 >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> effect seems smaller. Of 30-ish sites investigated there, 15 were >>>>>>>>>> unaffected and the rest had seemingly minor changes. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The high counter might be because linkedin triggers it, and >>>>>>>>>> linkedin was seemingly not affected. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> This does not mean that it's safe to remove the slightly (to me) >>>>>>>>>> unexpected quirk, but it might be. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Unclear to me also, but I'm hopeful. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks, everyone! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Mason >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *WebKit*: Positive (https://github.com/whatwg/ >>>>>>>>>> html/issues/7867#issuecomment-2124317504) This isn't a standards >>>>>>>>>> position, just a github comment. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Web developers*: No signals No signals >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Other signals*: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> WebView application risks >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of existing APIs, >>>>>>>>>> such that it has potentially high risk for Android WebView-based >>>>>>>>>> applications? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> None >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Debuggability >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> None >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests >>>>>>>>>> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md> >>>>>>>>>> ?Yes >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> https://wpt.fyi/results/html/rendering/non-replaced- >>>>>>>>>> elements/sections-and-headings >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Flag name on about://flagsNone >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Finch feature nameNone >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Non-finch justification >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> No Finch flag yet - this is just at the "Intent to Deprecate" >>>>>>>>>> stage, not the "Removal" stage. Only warnings will be shown for now. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Requires code in //chrome?False >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Tracking bughttps://issues.chromium.org/issues/394111284 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Estimated milestonesDevTrial on desktop136DevTrial on Android136 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status >>>>>>>>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/6192419898654720?gate= >>>>>>>>>> 5420483144843264 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> This intent message was generated by Chrome Platform Status >>>>>>>>>> <https://chromestatus.com/>. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 3:47 PM Jason Robbins <jrobb...@google.com> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Oh, and to clarify, I was suggesting that you could copy using >>>>>>>>>> the small copy-icon button and paste it on this thread as a reply. >>>>>>>>>> Don't >>>>>>>>>> start a new blink-dev thread or use the "Post directly to blink-dev" >>>>>>>>>> button >>>>>>>>>> (because that will start a new thread). >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>> jason! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, March 4, 2025 at 3:43:34 PM UTC-8 Jason Robbins wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The kicker: the chromestatus tool only gives you one shot at >>>>>>>>>> creating the intent email. Now that I've done it once, that button >>>>>>>>>> is gone. >>>>>>>>>> In order to send another email, it seems that I'd have to create an >>>>>>>>>> entirely new chromestatus entry, and I'm loath to do that. Let me >>>>>>>>>> know if >>>>>>>>>> it's enough to point you to the chromestatus page itself >>>>>>>>>> <https://chromestatus.com/feature/6192419898654720> to see the >>>>>>>>>> updated sections? Sorry. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Mason, here's a link to the intent preview page for this feature >>>>>>>>>> entry that you could copy again: >>>>>>>>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/6192419898654720/gate/ >>>>>>>>>> 5420483144843264/intent >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> ChromeStatus doesn't offer that button after the intent thread is >>>>>>>>>> detected simply because we reuse that UI area to show review status >>>>>>>>>> info, >>>>>>>>>> which is typically the next step in the process. However, that >>>>>>>>>> button is >>>>>>>>>> just a link to the intent preview page, and it is always available >>>>>>>>>> if you >>>>>>>>>> fill in the feature ID and gate ID. Of course, any copy-and-pasted >>>>>>>>>> email >>>>>>>>>> can fall out of date, and it only has a subset of the feature entry >>>>>>>>>> fields, >>>>>>>>>> so reviewers should make use of the full feature entry as needed. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>> jason! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "blink-dev" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. >>>>> To view this discussion visit >>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAM%3DNeDiq9dDw-po-DKJ-Oh6Bm8Z1sBSio1_KnT-nBN9Z%3D4ESRw%40mail.gmail.com >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAM%3DNeDiq9dDw-po-DKJ-Oh6Bm8Z1sBSio1_KnT-nBN9Z%3D4ESRw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>> . >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Simon Pieters >>>> https://www.mozilla.com/ >>>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "blink-dev" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. >>> To view this discussion visit >>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CADsXd2N3Vu8nd2Haeqsf5mdkmXY5MnKutMBhHS7vb%3DN_zMSSHg%40mail.gmail.com >>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CADsXd2N3Vu8nd2Haeqsf5mdkmXY5MnKutMBhHS7vb%3DN_zMSSHg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>> . >>> >> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "blink-dev" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. > To view this discussion visit > https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAM%3DNeDhB9%2BpP_AUa7SAS8RSgcG8evu23akgogHE3-qEL6d0H%3DQ%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAM%3DNeDhB9%2BpP_AUa7SAS8RSgcG8evu23akgogHE3-qEL6d0H%3DQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAOMQ%2Bw-a392Xkwur9CM6t1C3X0VubAkwQ1RzF1QTTrF8Om057g%40mail.gmail.com.
